Product comparison · 2 monitors

Philips LCD monitor with LED backlight 226V3LSB25/10 vs Philips Brilliance 229C4QSB/69 computer monitor

Add a product
  • 74specifications compared
  • 29differ
  • 45identical
  • 5known for one product only

Key differences

  • Display brightness (typical)
    • LCD monitor with LED backlight 226V3LSB25/10:200 cd/m²
    • Brilliance 229C4QSB/69 computer monitor:250 cd/m²
  • Response time
    • LCD monitor with LED backlight 226V3LSB25/10:5 ms
    • Brilliance 229C4QSB/69 computer monitor:7 ms
  • Contrast ratio (typical)
    • LCD monitor with LED backlight 226V3LSB25/10:600:1
    • Brilliance 229C4QSB/69 computer monitor:1000:1
  • Contrast ratio (dynamic)
    • LCD monitor with LED backlight 226V3LSB25/10:10000000:1
    • Brilliance 229C4QSB/69 computer monitor:20000000:1
  • Viewing angle, horizontal
    • LCD monitor with LED backlight 226V3LSB25/10:90°
    • Brilliance 229C4QSB/69 computer monitor:178°
  • Viewing angle, vertical
    • LCD monitor with LED backlight 226V3LSB25/10:65°
    • Brilliance 229C4QSB/69 computer monitor:178°
  • Viewable size, horizontal
    • LCD monitor with LED backlight 226V3LSB25/10:47.7 cm
    • Brilliance 229C4QSB/69 computer monitor:47.5 cm
  • Viewable size, vertical
    • LCD monitor with LED backlight 226V3LSB25/10:26.8 cm
    • Brilliance 229C4QSB/69 computer monitor:26.7 cm

Side by side

Differences highlightedShow differences only (on)
Comparison of 226V3LSB25/10, 229C4QSB/69
79 specifications
Display8 differ
Display technologyKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceLED
Panel typeKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceIPS
Display brightness (typical)Differs200 cd/m²250 cd/m²
Response timeDiffers5 ms7 ms
Supported video modesKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source1080p
Contrast ratio (typical)Differs600:11000:1
Contrast ratio (dynamic)Differs10000000:120000000:1
Viewing angle, horizontalDiffers90°178°
Viewing angle, verticalDiffers65°178°
Viewable size, horizontalDiffers47.7 cm47.5 cm
Viewable size, verticalDiffers26.8 cm26.7 cm
Performance1 differ
Windows operating systems supportedDiffersWindows 7 Home Premium, Windows 7 Home Premium x64, Windows 7 Professional, Windows 7 Professional x64, Windows 7 Starter, Windows 7 Starter x64, Windows 7 Ultimate, Windows 7 Ultimate x64, Windows XP Home, Windows XP Home x64, Windows XP Professional, Windows XP Professional x64Windows 7 Home Premium, Windows 7 Home Premium x64, Windows 7 Professional, Windows 7 Professional x64, Windows 7 Starter, Windows 7 Starter x64, Windows 7 Ultimate, Windows 7 Ultimate x64, Windows Vista Business, Windows Vista Business x64, Windows Vista Home Basic, Windows Vista Home Basic x64, Wi
Ports & interfaces1 differ
DVI-D ports quantityKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source1
HDCPDiffersNoYes
Ergonomics2 differ
VESA mountingDiffersYesNo
Tilt angle rangeDiffers-5 - 20°-3 - 15°
Panel mounting interfaceKnown for one100 x 100 mmUnknown — not stated by the source
Power3 differ
Power consumption (typical)Differs19.1 W25 W
Power consumption (standby)Differs0.5 W0.3 W
Power consumption (off)Differs0.5 W0.3 W
Weight & dimensions8 differ
Width (with stand)Differs532 mm509 mm
Depth (with stand)Differs209 mm180 mm
Height (with stand)Differs397 mm401 mm
Weight (with stand)Differs3.61 kg2.73 kg
Width (without stand)Differs532 mm509 mm
Depth (without stand)Differs51 mm34 mm
Height (without stand)Differs336 mm316 mm
Weight (without stand)Differs3.3 kg1.74 kg
Packaging data4 differ
Package widthDiffers606 mm565 mm
Package depthDiffers100 mm139 mm
Package heightDiffers409 mm533 mm
Package weightDiffers4.78 kg4.67 kg
Other features2 differ
Screen format adjustmentsDiffers4:3, 16:9, Auto16:9
CertificationDiffersBSMI, CE Mark, FCC Class B, GOST, PSB, SASO, SEMKO, TUV Ergo, TUV/GS, UL/cUL, WEEERoHS, BSMI, CE Mark, FCC Class B, GOST, SASO, SEMKO, TCO 5.2, TUV/ISO9241-307, UL/cUL, WEEE

A dash means the value is not stated by the source. Unknown values are never counted for or against a product, and there is no overall score.

More monitor comparisons

All monitor comparisons